Cargando…

Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia

PURPOSE: The General Electric (GE) Swiftscan solution combines a new Low Energy High Resolution and Sensitivity collimator (LEHRS) with image processing (Clarity 2D) and tomographic step and shoot continuous mode. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and physical performances of this new te...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thibault, F., Bailly, M., Le Rouzic, G., Metrard, G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6752842/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31536519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222490
_version_ 1783452797350445056
author Thibault, F.
Bailly, M.
Le Rouzic, G.
Metrard, G.
author_facet Thibault, F.
Bailly, M.
Le Rouzic, G.
Metrard, G.
author_sort Thibault, F.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The General Electric (GE) Swiftscan solution combines a new Low Energy High Resolution and Sensitivity collimator (LEHRS) with image processing (Clarity 2D) and tomographic step and shoot continuous mode. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and physical performances of this new technology in bone scintigraphy. METHODS: Physical phantom measurements were performed using GE LEHRS, GE Low Energy High Resolution (LEHR) and Siemens LEHR collimators. These measurements were associated with a prospective clinical study. Sixty-seven patients referred for bone scintigraphy were enrolled from February to July 2018. Each patient underwent two acquisitions consecutively on GE and Siemens gamma camera, using respectively Swiftscan solution and LEHR collimator. RESULTS: On planar acquisitions, maximum sensitivity was 100 cts/MBq for Siemens LEHR. GE SwiftScan LEHRS and GE LEHR maximum sensitivity were respectively 9% and 22% lower. Using Clarity 2D, GE Swiftscan LEHRS spatial resolution was the best with 9.2 mm versus 10.1 mm and 10.6 mm for GE LEHR and Siemens LEHR collimators. In tomographic mode, the sensitivity of GE Swiftscan solution was superior to both LEHR systems (16% and 25% respectively for Siemens and GE). There was no significant difference in spatial resolution. In clinical use, signal was higher on Siemens system and noise was lower on GE Swiftscan solution. Contrast-to-noise ratios were not significantly different between the two systems. There was a significant image quality improvement with GE SwiftScan in planar images and in whole body scan. No significant difference in image quality was observed on SPECT images. CONCLUSION: New GE SwiftScan collimator design improved sensitivity compared to “classical” GE LEHR collimator without compromising resolution. GE SwiftScan solution enhances planar image quality with a better Clarity 2D resolution recovery and noise treatment. In SPECT mode, GE SwiftScan solution improves volumetric sensitivity without significant impact on image quality, and could lead to time or dose reduction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6752842
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67528422019-09-27 Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia Thibault, F. Bailly, M. Le Rouzic, G. Metrard, G. PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: The General Electric (GE) Swiftscan solution combines a new Low Energy High Resolution and Sensitivity collimator (LEHRS) with image processing (Clarity 2D) and tomographic step and shoot continuous mode. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and physical performances of this new technology in bone scintigraphy. METHODS: Physical phantom measurements were performed using GE LEHRS, GE Low Energy High Resolution (LEHR) and Siemens LEHR collimators. These measurements were associated with a prospective clinical study. Sixty-seven patients referred for bone scintigraphy were enrolled from February to July 2018. Each patient underwent two acquisitions consecutively on GE and Siemens gamma camera, using respectively Swiftscan solution and LEHR collimator. RESULTS: On planar acquisitions, maximum sensitivity was 100 cts/MBq for Siemens LEHR. GE SwiftScan LEHRS and GE LEHR maximum sensitivity were respectively 9% and 22% lower. Using Clarity 2D, GE Swiftscan LEHRS spatial resolution was the best with 9.2 mm versus 10.1 mm and 10.6 mm for GE LEHR and Siemens LEHR collimators. In tomographic mode, the sensitivity of GE Swiftscan solution was superior to both LEHR systems (16% and 25% respectively for Siemens and GE). There was no significant difference in spatial resolution. In clinical use, signal was higher on Siemens system and noise was lower on GE Swiftscan solution. Contrast-to-noise ratios were not significantly different between the two systems. There was a significant image quality improvement with GE SwiftScan in planar images and in whole body scan. No significant difference in image quality was observed on SPECT images. CONCLUSION: New GE SwiftScan collimator design improved sensitivity compared to “classical” GE LEHR collimator without compromising resolution. GE SwiftScan solution enhances planar image quality with a better Clarity 2D resolution recovery and noise treatment. In SPECT mode, GE SwiftScan solution improves volumetric sensitivity without significant impact on image quality, and could lead to time or dose reduction. Public Library of Science 2019-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6752842/ /pubmed/31536519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222490 Text en © 2019 Thibault et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Thibault, F.
Bailly, M.
Le Rouzic, G.
Metrard, G.
Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia
title Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia
title_full Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia
title_fullStr Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia
title_full_unstemmed Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia
title_short Clinical evaluation of General Electric new Swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on NaI-camera: A head to head comparison with Siemens Symbia
title_sort clinical evaluation of general electric new swiftscan solution in bone scintigraphy on nai-camera: a head to head comparison with siemens symbia
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6752842/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31536519
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222490
work_keys_str_mv AT thibaultf clinicalevaluationofgeneralelectricnewswiftscansolutioninbonescintigraphyonnaicameraaheadtoheadcomparisonwithsiemenssymbia
AT baillym clinicalevaluationofgeneralelectricnewswiftscansolutioninbonescintigraphyonnaicameraaheadtoheadcomparisonwithsiemenssymbia
AT lerouzicg clinicalevaluationofgeneralelectricnewswiftscansolutioninbonescintigraphyonnaicameraaheadtoheadcomparisonwithsiemenssymbia
AT metrardg clinicalevaluationofgeneralelectricnewswiftscansolutioninbonescintigraphyonnaicameraaheadtoheadcomparisonwithsiemenssymbia